<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Multimedia/Flash Screenreader Tango</title>
	<atom:link href="http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/</link>
	<description>He’s employed at a university. He calls himself a web designer. These are his brain droppings.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2011 04:19:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Why is Everything so &#8220;Flashy&#8221;? &#124; HTMLCenter - Web Help and Web Development Blog</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-815</link>
		<dc:creator>Why is Everything so &#8220;Flashy&#8221;? &#124; HTMLCenter - Web Help and Web Development Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Sep 2008 02:49:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-815</guid>
		<description>[...] interesting discussion on this subject was started over at CollegeWebGuy.com. Since then, I&#8217;ve come across even more examples, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] interesting discussion on this subject was started over at CollegeWebGuy.com. Since then, I&#8217;ve come across even more examples, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eduStyle Blog &#124;&#124; Blog Archive &#187; Article Links - Ball State, Boston U, Case Western, and more</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-796</link>
		<dc:creator>eduStyle Blog &#124;&#124; Blog Archive &#187; Article Links - Ball State, Boston U, Case Western, and more</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 05:25:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-796</guid>
		<description>[...] Multimedia/Flash Screenreader Tango [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Multimedia/Flash Screenreader Tango [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drew</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-771</link>
		<dc:creator>Drew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:12:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-771</guid>
		<description>Must be nice to have those programmers on the bus, Josh.  You&#039;re very right.  You don&#039;t HAVE to use flash.  Just a few days ago I found this &lt;a href=&quot;http://css-tricks.com/creating-a-slick-auto-playing-featured-content-slider/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;great little jQuery / CSS slideshow&lt;/a&gt; that I&#039;m considering using instead of flash/slideshowpro.  It performs nicely, and I&#039;ve been looking hard at how the content is presented with javascript off.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://css-tricks.com/examples/FeaturedContentSlider/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Here&#039;s the demo&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Must be nice to have those programmers on the bus, Josh.  You&#8217;re very right.  You don&#8217;t HAVE to use flash.  Just a few days ago I found this <a href="http://css-tricks.com/creating-a-slick-auto-playing-featured-content-slider/" rel="nofollow">great little jQuery / CSS slideshow</a> that I&#8217;m considering using instead of flash/slideshowpro.  It performs nicely, and I&#8217;ve been looking hard at how the content is presented with javascript off.  <a href="http://css-tricks.com/examples/FeaturedContentSlider/" rel="nofollow">Here&#8217;s the demo</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Nichols</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-770</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Nichols</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-770</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the link to my blog post!

I have to agree with using JavaScript over Flash where possible. It degrades nicely and, if you do it right, is very accessible. When I wrote that post about Flash and multimedia, my office decided on Slideshow Pro because we didn&#039;t have anyone on staff who could program. Now, that we have a couple of programmers, we can begin to move away from pre-fab solutions and create something that is exactly what we need and still keep accessibility a priority.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the link to my blog post!</p>
<p>I have to agree with using JavaScript over Flash where possible. It degrades nicely and, if you do it right, is very accessible. When I wrote that post about Flash and multimedia, my office decided on Slideshow Pro because we didn&#8217;t have anyone on staff who could program. Now, that we have a couple of programmers, we can begin to move away from pre-fab solutions and create something that is exactly what we need and still keep accessibility a priority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bring on the Accessibility Lawsuits</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-768</link>
		<dc:creator>Bring on the Accessibility Lawsuits</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-768</guid>
		<description>[...] Biography     Multimedia/Flash Screenreader Tango   Aug [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Biography     Multimedia/Flash Screenreader Tango   Aug [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: OtherWebGuy</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-767</link>
		<dc:creator>OtherWebGuy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:57:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-767</guid>
		<description>One more thing to consider when developing something in Flash is: &quot;Does this need to be Flash?&quot;

I find that probably 90% of the Flash applications used on various Web sites really don&#039;t need to be Flash. Rather, the Web developer simply wanted to use Flash, because the thought of trying to write a similar application in more accessible constructs simply did not appeal to them.

For instance, there is very little in that slide show that could not have been accomplished using AJAX (which, provided you program it correctly, still degrades without any detrimental effects).

Anything that couldn&#039;t have been accomplished using good old-fashioned AJAX probably isn&#039;t really adding that much to the slide show anyway.

Xavier&#039;s new Web site is also an astounding example of why you need to develop your sites to degrade properly. Try visiting their new site with javascript disabled. I think you&#039;ll actually be surprised.

When I disabled javascript on their home page, I found that the slide show did not display at all (in fact, it told me that I didn&#039;t have Flash installed!?!?) and the news scroller area near the bottom-left of the page was no longer contained. Rather, it just overflowed all the way down the rest of the page, weaving in and out from behind other elements on the page. Couldn&#039;t they just have put that inside of an &quot;overflow: auto&quot; container and removed the overflow style parameter with javascript once the page loaded?

BTW - Regarding closed captioning/subtitles for Flash videos, Camtasia Studio does a decent job with that.

Thanks for sharing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One more thing to consider when developing something in Flash is: &#8220;Does this need to be Flash?&#8221;</p>
<p>I find that probably 90% of the Flash applications used on various Web sites really don&#8217;t need to be Flash. Rather, the Web developer simply wanted to use Flash, because the thought of trying to write a similar application in more accessible constructs simply did not appeal to them.</p>
<p>For instance, there is very little in that slide show that could not have been accomplished using AJAX (which, provided you program it correctly, still degrades without any detrimental effects).</p>
<p>Anything that couldn&#8217;t have been accomplished using good old-fashioned AJAX probably isn&#8217;t really adding that much to the slide show anyway.</p>
<p>Xavier&#8217;s new Web site is also an astounding example of why you need to develop your sites to degrade properly. Try visiting their new site with javascript disabled. I think you&#8217;ll actually be surprised.</p>
<p>When I disabled javascript on their home page, I found that the slide show did not display at all (in fact, it told me that I didn&#8217;t have Flash installed!?!?) and the news scroller area near the bottom-left of the page was no longer contained. Rather, it just overflowed all the way down the rest of the page, weaving in and out from behind other elements on the page. Couldn&#8217;t they just have put that inside of an &#8220;overflow: auto&#8221; container and removed the overflow style parameter with javascript once the page loaded?</p>
<p>BTW &#8211; Regarding closed captioning/subtitles for Flash videos, Camtasia Studio does a decent job with that.</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Drew</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-764</link>
		<dc:creator>Drew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:11:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-764</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m floored. These are some great insights.  Thanks for taking the time to share.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m floored. These are some great insights.  Thanks for taking the time to share.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-763</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:59:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-763</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve thought about this problem, too, and the one solution that is better for most people in most cases is progressive enhancement.

Strip your markup to basic elements (not including embed and param because those are plagued with cross-browser problems). Mark up mp3, mov, flv and all media with simple anchor elements and a simple text description, perhaps in an unordered list. Then use your favorite JavaScript media script to replace the container with the enhanced SWF. You mentioned SWFObject; jQuery&#039;s media plugin and Flash plugin are also good bets. An example that I created: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/champions2008/ (check out the markup in the video area).

The edge case is how many will have JavaScript enabled but NOT Flash: Your elements might look shabby without the proper style, but at least it&#039;s accessible for the blind; it might need proper style for contrast. If your SWFs can read in external variables from the markup (like calling on an XML file or mp3 file), let that markup be the fall back and avoid using the lame &quot;Please install Adobe Flash&quot; message. How are iPhone users going to feel about that message?

As for closed captions, CC for Flash (http://ncam.wgbh.org/webaccess/ccforflash/) is all right, and a transcript of that can certainly be inserted into the element that is being replaced with Flash.

I&#039;m curious about what you meant by &quot;using the xml file not only to control the slideshow but generate alternate content.&quot; I know you can read XML with jQuery&#039;s Ajax requests, but that would require JavaScript being enabled, and thus if it was, there&#039;s no reason not to go whole hog and insert Flash into the DOM with JavaScript and use the XML file with Flash anyway.

Like I said earlier, to be accessible (generally speaking) is to have the server put content into the page before it gets served and to mark it up with the appropriate elements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve thought about this problem, too, and the one solution that is better for most people in most cases is progressive enhancement.</p>
<p>Strip your markup to basic elements (not including embed and param because those are plagued with cross-browser problems). Mark up mp3, mov, flv and all media with simple anchor elements and a simple text description, perhaps in an unordered list. Then use your favorite JavaScript media script to replace the container with the enhanced SWF. You mentioned SWFObject; jQuery&#8217;s media plugin and Flash plugin are also good bets. An example that I created: <a href="http://www2.ljworld.com/news/champions2008/" rel="nofollow">http://www2.ljworld.com/news/champions2008/</a> (check out the markup in the video area).</p>
<p>The edge case is how many will have JavaScript enabled but NOT Flash: Your elements might look shabby without the proper style, but at least it&#8217;s accessible for the blind; it might need proper style for contrast. If your SWFs can read in external variables from the markup (like calling on an XML file or mp3 file), let that markup be the fall back and avoid using the lame &#8220;Please install Adobe Flash&#8221; message. How are iPhone users going to feel about that message?</p>
<p>As for closed captions, CC for Flash (<a href="http://ncam.wgbh.org/webaccess/ccforflash/" rel="nofollow">http://ncam.wgbh.org/webaccess/ccforflash/</a>) is all right, and a transcript of that can certainly be inserted into the element that is being replaced with Flash.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious about what you meant by &#8220;using the xml file not only to control the slideshow but generate alternate content.&#8221; I know you can read XML with jQuery&#8217;s Ajax requests, but that would require JavaScript being enabled, and thus if it was, there&#8217;s no reason not to go whole hog and insert Flash into the DOM with JavaScript and use the XML file with Flash anyway.</p>
<p>Like I said earlier, to be accessible (generally speaking) is to have the server put content into the page before it gets served and to mark it up with the appropriate elements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Bowling</title>
		<link>http://collegewebguy.com/2008/08/18/multimediaflash-screenreader-tango/comment-page-1/#comment-756</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Bowling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://collegewebguy.com/?p=234#comment-756</guid>
		<description>This topic is always on my mind. Everyone wants their homepage to be flash oriented (and I&#039;m a huge fan of SSP myself.) Personally, I feel Xavier is a bit too heavy on flash, as the moving parts are a bit distracting to me (especially the scroller on the bottom.)

The question that always comes to my mind, though, is what the legal and ethical obligations are for showing pictures. If a slideshow doesn&#039;t really show content, but is purely a piece of visual eye candy, is there a true obligation to make it fully accessible? Is there a value for non-sighted users being able to read that there is a photo of a smiling undergraduate student sitting on a park bench on the website?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This topic is always on my mind. Everyone wants their homepage to be flash oriented (and I&#8217;m a huge fan of SSP myself.) Personally, I feel Xavier is a bit too heavy on flash, as the moving parts are a bit distracting to me (especially the scroller on the bottom.)</p>
<p>The question that always comes to my mind, though, is what the legal and ethical obligations are for showing pictures. If a slideshow doesn&#8217;t really show content, but is purely a piece of visual eye candy, is there a true obligation to make it fully accessible? Is there a value for non-sighted users being able to read that there is a photo of a smiling undergraduate student sitting on a park bench on the website?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

